PRESENT
Ben Caldwell
Mcappelli
Wendy Chisholm
Michael Cooper
Roberto Ellero
Al Gilman
Roberto Scano
Chris Ridpath
DISCUSSION
We discussed the table proposals [1]. The XHTML Working Group has indicated
that tables absolutely should not be used for layout. We accepted this for
future technology (e.g., XHTML 2.0) but need to address common practice with
current technology (primarily HTML 4.0), so we spent time discussing the
difference between data and layout tables. We did not all agree that there
is a clean distinction between these kinds of tables, and it was proposed
that some markup classically associated with data tables could be useful in
the interpretation of some kinds of layout tables. However, we weren't sure
what the technology support would be for some of these usages, and need to
perform some tests before making decisions about this. We may also find it
useful to consider "basic" and "advanced" techniques - at the basic level we
might say there is a clean distinction between data and layout tables and
put out rules for the features of each (easy conformance), while at the
advanced level we might acknowledge that there is a continuum and provide
guidance for the use of certain markup techniques in certain situations. We
also discussed the use of "class" and "summary" keywords to distinguish
types of tables and saw some value to proposing techniques involving those.
Full IRC discussion log at [2].
ACTION ITEMS
* Ben: experiment with tables with different structure in Assistive
Technologies
* Wendy: collect examples of layout tables and experiment with benefits of
using the markup to annotate structure. Forward to list for interpretation
of the semantics buried in them that could need markup.
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003AprJun/0290.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/11-wai-wcag-irc.html
Michael Cooper
Accessibility Project Manager
Watchfire
1 Hines Rd
Kanata, ON K2K 3C7
Canada
+1 613 599 3888 x4019
http://bobby.watchfire.com/